The India-Afghanistan-Pakistan Conundrum – Tariq Tufail

Mujahideen Fighters in Afghanistan, 1984.

As the war in Afghanistan continues, so does the purported regional chess game between India and Pakistan. Below, Tariq Tufail, from Karachi, presents his views on Pakistan’s evolving policy in Afghanistan:

A huge shift in the U.S. Afghanistan policy is reportedly taking place.  The London conference and the meeting in Turkey indicate that some degree of reconciliation and an integration of the Taliban into the mainstream in Afghanistan will be attempted in the next 18 months. To support this effort, donors have already pledged about $500 million. When these events unfold, they will have a great effect on Afghanistan and the region, comparable to the Soviet withdrawal, the fall of the Najibullah Government and the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan.

What are the ramifications for Pakistani security and foreign policy? Unfortunately, I think this policy shift comes at an inconvenient time for Pakistan, when the Pakistani public and armed forces have not completely renounced the use of Islamist proxies to achieve our diplomatic objectives. In this context, there is a great danger that Pakistan will commit foreign policy and security blunders.

First, a background:

Pakistan’s perception of its security is India-centric. To this effect, Pakistan has always sought “strategic depth” in Afghanistan. Though the definition is vague (and probably dreamed up by our generals who have given us similar disastrous “strategies” in the past), the prevalent theory is that a friendly and pliable Afghan government will provide the landmass and the population in any future conflict with India. Furthermore, a Pro-Pakistan (and by implication anti-India) tilt in Afghanistan will protect Pakistan from:

(i) a two-pronged front against India
(ii) Pashtun nationalism endangering both the Durrand line and our territorial integrity

While the pursuit of “strategic depth” by itself is neither unethical nor dangerous, the method by which we had pursued it until the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan has endangered our security and threatened the very existence of Pakistan.

The training of Afghan fighters for the Soviet Jihad, the infrastructure of madrassas, gun culture and drug running, have severely destabilized our tribal areas and FATA. The extremist interpretation of Islam, which provided the ideological foundation for the mujahideen, on the one hand prevented economic and social development, and on the other served as a magnet for undesirables all over the world (it was in this environment that Osama Bin Laden found refuge in Afghanistan). While it was immoral and unethical to foist this culture on the Afghans, it was also inevitable for these same extremist ideologies, gun and drug cultures  to spill on to the Pakistani side of the border, endangering our own population.

In addition to utilizing the various terrorist organizations and militants to create a pliant Afghan government, Pakistan also has had a history of using such groups against India. The hijacking of Indian Airlines Flight 814 and its diversion to Afghanistan in order to free people of (Pakistani) Punjab origin (among them Omar Sheikh Sayeed, implicated in the killing of Daniel Pearl, and Maulana Mazood Azhar, the Amir of Jaish-e-Mohammed, implicated in assasination attempts on Gen. Musharraf) is a significant example. (Before the readers of this article protest that Pakistan had nothing to do with the Taliban, the role of Pakistani armed forces and intelligence agents in the training and nurturing of Taliban is undeniable and one can refer to the Kunduz “Airlift of Evil” also covered in “Descent into Chaos” by Ahmed Rashid.)

Fast forwarding to the future:

It is inevitable that Pakistan will play a central role in the reconciliation between the Taliban and ISAF in Afghanistan. Pakistan’s leverage arises from:

(i) the possible sheltering of the top leadership of the Taliban (including Mullah Omar, and members of the “Quetta Shura“),  as well as our influence with other figures like Jalaluddin Haqqani and Gulbuddin Hekmatiyar,
(ii) the role of Pakistani armed forces in preventing Taliban movement from Afghanistan into Pakistan to carry out cross-border attacks and,
(iii) Our indispensability for logistic routes and supply of NATO forces in Afghanistan.

The way we use this leverage will determine whether our security will be strengthened in the long term or whether we slip into another spiral of instability, several orders of magnitude worse than what we have today.

Is there a danger in reverting to Pre-9/11 status and why is it a bad idea?

COAS Kayani has indicated that Pakistan’s primary security threat is India and “strategic depth” is still being sought in Afghanistan. In addition, there is a widespread school of thought in Pakistan that the current violence and instability in the country is the result of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. Therefore, taking these factors into account, it is clear that the establishment finds it very attractive to revert to a pre-9/11 status – where the Taliban is supported and nurtured by the ISI and armed forces, a pliant Taliban-supported government is installed in Afghanistan with the associated medieval interpretation of Islam, and the various Afghan forces are used for leverage against India in Kashmir. In fact, this possibility has rattled India, which until a few weeks back had refused talks with Pakistan until concrete progress was made in the Mumbai case, but now is pushing for dialogue.

The prevalent sentiment that a Pre-9/11 scenario will put Pakistan on the driver’s seat in Afghanistan, India and the rest of the world, was further enforced by our foreign minister, who declared, “India had blinked on talks” and “Pakistan has held its ground.” Pakistan’s foreign minister even reneged on the progress made so far on Track-II diplomacy with India on Kashmir under the Musharraf regime. In addition, Jamaat-ud-Dawah and other “Punjabi Taliban” groups who were laying low after Mumbai, surfaced and held a rally in Muzaffarabad on Feb 5, promising, among other things, to “spread Jihad in other parts of India beyond Kashmir.” All this before talks had even begun with India. In one sense, they can be viewed as pre-talks sabre rattling, and in another sense, it can be viewed as the establishment’s desire to return to a Pre-9/11, Pre-Mumbai status quo, which may be advantageous in the short-term.

However, this line of thinking is a huge fallacy due to two reasons:
1. Proxy warfare didn’t work in Kashmir

Pakistan has to wake up to the fact that Kashmir’s “jihad” has been a spectacular failure. After sparking many wars, sending in many Jihadis, sponsoring numerous resolutions in various international fora, we are nowhere near wrestling control of Kashmir. Direct military action supported by the Mujahideen is unlikely to work. The Kargil war was a spectacular defeat–despite recent attempts to spin it as a success–Nawaz Sharif to his credit made a face-saving exit after the sudden trip to the U.S. to meet President Clinton. If anything Kargil has indicated that future wars over Kashmir will invite international wrath as well as destabilize our politics.

India has held democratic elections and thinned out their military presence in Kashmir and the number of violent incidents have gone down year after year since 2002. Even when Pakistan’s leverage on the Mujahideen was the strongest, (in the 90’s),  and India’s economy was simultaneously the weakest with a balance of payment crisis, India demonstrated that it could hold on to Kashmir. Instead of  harming India, armed jihad against India has destabilized the Pakistani population, killed and maimed Kashmiris, reduced our international standing, de-legitimized the Kashmir cause and is unlikely to yield any result in the changed international attitude towards terrorism. Moreover, China’s wariness about the Mujahideen given the problem it faces in Xinjiang (recall that China did not support Pakistan during Kargil), the increasing economic gap between India and Pakistan (which will soon translate into a gap in defense and diplomatic capabilities) and the concomitant hardening of Indian public opinion as they flex their national strength further reduce any possibility of success.

2. With great power comes great responsibility

Secondly, if Pakistan is co-opted to hammer out a solution in Afghanistan by using our influence on the Taliban, the international community will shift responsibility to us . If another 9/11-like attack occurs by elements sheltered by the Taliban,  Pakistan will subsequently be blamed or asked to “do more”. Given the ideological leanings of the Taliban, as well as their involvement in the gun culture and violence, it is inevitable that Afghanistan will once again become a magnet for undesirable elements. Who in their right mind would want to be responsible for the actions of such elements?

Policing the behavior of Taliban, while simultaneously facing the threat of economic and military retaliation from the West for their bad behavior is an unenviable proposition.

So unpalatable as it might be, we should recognize the changed international scenario, the harm that we are causing to our population and go for a radical rethink of our Afghan policy and strategy. 

The contribution is the sole opinion of the author and does not necessarily represent the opinion of CHUP. If you would like to contribute a piece to CHUP, please email Kalsoom at changinguppakistan[at]gmail[dot]com. Pieces should be no longer than 800 words please. For past contributions, click here.

Stay Safe, Karachi

AFP/Getty Images

On Friday, a series of bomb blasts struck Karachi, killing at least 25 people and wounding more than 70 others. The first attack occurred Friday afternoon, when a motorcycle rigged with 15 kilograms of explosives detonated next to a bus on Shareh-e-Faisal carrying Shias to a religious procession marking the end of Muharram.

Less than two hours later, “a second explosion was heard outside the emergency ward of Jinnah Hospital where the injured were being shifted,” reported Dawn. Bomb disposal official Munir Sheikh told the news agency the bombing was also caused by explosives strapped to a motorcyle in the hospital’s parking lot. News agencies reported that another bomb was also recovered and defused from Jinnah Hospital. According to Express 24/7, 25 kilograms of explosives was planted in a a computer “box,” which was later identified by security personnel present at the hospital.

Given that previous attacks have sparked riots in Karachi, officials in the city immediately appealed for calm following the bombings. Waseem Ahmed, the Karachi police chief reportedly urged Shia mourners to carry on peacefully with their processions in other parts of the city, and Karachi’s mayor Mustafa Kamal was quoted saying, “Innocent lives have been lost, but people should not lose patience and kindly stay peaceful.” Express 24/7 spoke to other officials of the MQM, including Farooq Sattar, who pledged that the victims’ families would each receive 500,000 Rupees and the injured would receive 100,000 Rupees. The party also called for three days of mourning following today’s attacks.

No one has so far claimed responsibility for Friday’s twin bombings. Given past events, it is likely the perpetrators were militants connected to the Jaish-e-Muhammad/Lashkar-e-Jhanghvi/Sipah-e-Sahba nexus. In December, more than 50 people were killed when a suicide bomber attacked a Shia procession commemorating Ashura in Karachi. Following the attack, Interior Minister Rehman Malik told reported, “This pattern shows that this was a joint venture between Tehreek-i-Taliban and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ),” a Punjabi militant group that is sectarian in essence. In the April issue of the CTC Sentinel, Hassan Abbas wrote that the LeJ is believed to be “the lynch pin of the alignment between Al Qaeda, the Pakistani Taliban and sectarian groups.”

It is therefore impossible to pinpoint one group given the blurred lines between Pakistan’s militant and criminal groups. While the sectarian nature of Friday’s bombings bore a resemblance to December’s suicide bombing in Karachi, I wonder whether the recent [and still unconfirmed] death of Tehreek-e-Taliban chief Hakimullah Mehsud have spurred “revenge” attacks similar to those following the death of Baitullah Mehsud this past summer. Yesterday, Karachi, Lahore and Islamabad were all put on red alert, with reports that 10 suicide bombers had entered Karachi (only two had been caught).

We may not be entirely certain who was responsible for today’s attacks, but it is nevertheless horrific that they could happen at all. If all three cities were placed on red alert yesterday, was there not more that could be done to prevent today’s deaths? The targeting of Shia pilgrims as well as a hospital is not only tragic, but frankly also sickening. Is nowhere in Pakistan safe or untouched anymore?

The Ever-Devolving Blackwater Debate

Reuters: Wreckage of the destroyed girls' school in Dir.

On Wednesday, a bomb blast in Lower Dir killed seven people, including three schoolgirls and three U.S. military personnel, and wounded nearly 70 people, including two Americans and 63 schoolgirls, though the NY Times reported, “The medical superintendent in Timergara, the main town in Lower Dir, said that 122 girls were injured in the attack, a far higher number than originally reported.”

According to a statement released by the U.S. Embassy in Pakistan after the incident,

The Americans were U.S. military personnel in Pakistan conducting training at the invitation of the Pakistan Frontier Corps.  They were in Lower Dir to attend the inauguration ceremony of a school for girls that had recently been renovated with U.S. humanitarian assistance.

The bombing, which occurred just before 1100 PST, exploded “as a convoy of Pakistani security officials, journalists, and the American trainers were pulling into a girls’ school in the Haji Abad district of Lower Dir,” reported ABC News. The school destroyed in the attack, noted the news agency, was “separate from the school to which the convoy was driving.”

A girls’ school was completely destroyed Wednesday, and most of the victims were innocent children, many of who were  buried under rubble in the aftermath. That was the real tragedy today. Unfortunately, focus soon shifted to the U.S. military personnel’s  presence in Pakistan.

On Wednesday, military spokesman Major General Athar Abbas confirmed the U.S. Embassy statement that the Americans were there to train Pakistan’s Frontier Corps, part of a $400 million program called “a compromise between American and Pakistani officials looking for the least intrusive way to fortify security in an area where the Pakistani government has rejected the idea of American soldiers and where even the regular Pakistani Army is often not welcome,” by the NY Times in June 2008. COAS Gen. Kayani reportedly rejected any suggestion that would allow U.S. forces to operate on the ground, but finally allowed a “plan for American military advisers to instruct Pakistani trainers, who would in turn train Frontier Corps units in counterinsurgency tactics.”

As a result, more than 20 U.S. Special Forces have been stationed in the country, reported ABC News, while the UK’s Times Online noted there were “thought to be about a dozen” American personnel. The news agency added, “Britain is also building a training camp for the Frontier Corps in the southwestern province of Baluchistan and plans to deploy 24 army trainers there, along with six Americans, for three years from August 2010.”

These reports seem to verify the identity and context of the U.S. military personnel killed and injured today. However, many in Pakistan remain suspicious of these claims, connecting them instead to Blackwater private security contractors. This suspicion, a reflection of the current sentiment in Pakistan, has been fueled further by recent developments, including remarks by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates allegedly confirming the company’s presence in Pakistan, [the U.S. embassy contends he was speaking about private security companies in general]. Soon after, NWFP senior minister Bashir Ahmed Bilour further affirmed that Blackwater personnel were not only operating in the country, but were also training Pakistanis.

Not one to avoid the anti-American bandwagon, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan claimed responsibility for Wednesday’s bombing, but noted, “The Americans killed were members of the Blackwater group. We know they are responsible for bomb blasts in Peshawar and other Pakistani cities.”

Although the “military personnel were FC trainers” story seems to check out, would we ever really know otherwise? Truth be told, there have been increasing clues indicating Blackwater’s presence in Pakistan, but that does not mean that every American in Pakistan is a private security contractor. In my opinion, it is not the suspicion but the indiscriminate suspicion that I find inherently dangerous, fostering a cycle increasingly difficult to break. I’ll leave you with an interesting and insightful remark made to me by The News’ Mosharraf Zaidi:

I find it odd that objecting to a mercenary for-profit war company operating without accountability in Pakistan should be controversial at all. It’s a sad commentary on the absence of rational and linear thinking in both the so-called liberal and so-called right-wing camps. This issue has become a political football, instead of being taken seriously and resolved.

Thoughts?

Keepin’ it Classy Mista President

So a new video of our illustrious leader is making the rounds on the internet. Asif Ali Zardari, President of Pakistan, widower of Benazir, hugger of resistant VP candidates, and wannabe Brylcreem & Macleans poster child, was filmed telling one of his  political supporters to “Shaaatttt Appp.”

Whoah. Way harsh. Given that a goat is sacrificed almost daily to “protect Zardari from black magic,” maybe the President should consider being a little nicer to people, especially those who show up at his rallies.

Think about the poor goaties, Zardari sahib.

Visiting Dhaka’s 1971 Liberation War Museum

This is the first post in a series on the 1971 War, also known as the Liberation War of Bangladesh. The series aims to be an honest portrayal of both sides of the war and its aftermath, from the atrocities committed against the Bengali people, to those  also committed by the Bengali Mukhti Bahini, to the refugees in West Bengal, as well as the later persecution of the Bihari (Urdu-speaking) people in Bangladesh. If you have a story you’d like to share, please let me know:

As many of you know, I am Pakistani. My allegiance to this country has been the driving factor when I decided on my educational focus, my career path, and of course, this blog. What many of you don’t know, however, is that my mother is Bangladeshi, and I am very proud of my Bengali heritage and family.

My quest to better understand my own identity frequently led me to study a pivotal moment in both Pakistan and Bangladesh’s history – the 1971 War, known interchangeably as the Bangladesh Liberation War and the 1971 Indo-Pak War, depending on your perspective. The conflict ended with the secession of East Pakistan and the birth of Bangladesh, but it also resulted in the loss of many Bangladeshi lives at the hands of Pakistani soldiers, (the death toll varies from 20,000 to three million depending on the source). The atrocities were endless, and many today label 1971 the “Bangladesh Genocide.”

Throughout my life, I never had to look far to learn about 1971 – the entire Bangladeshi side of my family was somehow involved in the war. What I heard first hand was haunting – stories of mass graves, protests, torture and defiance. But growing up in Pakistan, these anecdotes clashed considerably with how the war was presented and perceived in Pakistan. While I am very aware that there is no black and white to any conflict, such a discrepancy was a challenge to better understand and share my own observations of the war.

I write this piece fresh from a trip to Dhaka and a day after convincing my lovely cousin to accompany me to the Liberation War Museum, which displays the history prior to and during the 1971 War. The museum sits in a house in Shegunbagicha in Dhaka, leased out by the family of one of my cousins and managed by curator Akku Chowdhury.

The museum is rich with information, filled with remnants of a history that heavily defines the Bangladeshi collective. One of the first rooms you enter is a display on the 1952 Language Movement, which called for the recognition of Bangla as a second official language of Pakistan (Urdu was established as the sole national language after 1947). This protest over language, bringing men and women alike on to the streets, sparked a nationalist fervor and marked the beginning of the Bengali demand for their  democratic and cultural rights. In 2000, UNESCO established February 21 as International Mother Language Day, in tribute to the movement and the subsequent lives lost.

Women during the Language Movement wore white saris w/black borders, now worn every Mother Lang Day

As I walked through the museum, jotting down thoughts and taking illicit photographs (please note: you are not actually allowed to take photos in the museum, my apologies to the museum staff who tried valiantly to stop me), several pieces caught my attention. The first was a poster of the iconic cartoon by ‘Patua’ Quamrul Hassan depicting former Pakistani president Gen. Yahya Khan as a demon, accompanied by the text, Annihilate these Demons. From my understanding, the “demons” referred to the Pakistani soldiers undertaking the military operation that began in March 1971.

Photos taken by crappy camera phone, apologies.

I was also struck by a copy of a memo written by former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger for former U.S. President Richard Nixon. Addressed April 28, 1971, the paper presented policy options for the U.S. involvement in the 1971 War. Nixon had checked policy option #3 – “An effort to help Yahya achieve a negotiated settlement,” with a scribbled note, “Don’t squeeze Yahya at this time.”

Policy memo with Nixon side note

In a recent article for the Daily Star, Asif Mahfuz noted that U.S. policy followed a course later known as “The Tilt,” due to Nixon’s friendship with Yahya and a strategic interest in China. He wrote,

By using what Nixon and Kissinger called quiet diplomacy, the administration gave the green light to the Pakistanis. In one instance, Nixon declared to a Pakistani delegation that “Yahya is a good friend.” Rather than express concern over the ongoing brutal military repression, Nixon explained that he “understands the anguish of the decisions which (Yahya) had to make”…. In a handwritten letter on August 7th, 1971, to President Yahya, Nixon writes: “Those who want a more peaceful world in the generations to come will forever be in your debt.

The museum display was a telling example of how strategic interests and realpolitik often outweigh what is morally right or acceptable. Walking through the Liberation War Museum, I was constantly reminded of this fact. Many of the rooms contained uniforms, photos, and belongings of the innocent civilians killed, as well as those of the Mukthi Juddha (“Liberation Fighters” who were part of the militia, the Mukhti Bahini). One particularly memorable and disturbing display featured the 70 skulls and 5392 other bones recovered from a “killing field” in Mirpur, Dhaka, where many who were killed by the Pakistan Army were discarded.

Skulls excavated from Mirpur.

Rape was also widely perpetrated during the 1971 War. According to the museum sources, allegedly 250,000 women were tortured and raped by Pakistani soldiers during the conflict. However, while many women were victims of the atrocities, I was also struck by how many were central figures in the war for independence, fighting alongside the men. The Liberation War Museum was filled with photos of Bengali women outfitted in white saris, holding rifles and conducting military exercises. One poster displayed in the museum encompassed this phenomenon perfectly:

Translation: "All Bengali Mothers and Daughters Are Liberation Fighters"

It has been 39 years since the 1971 War, and there are still many lessons for Pakistan to not only learn but also accept. As Imran Khan over at the blog ATP recently noted, “History must never be forgotten, no matter whether it is flattering to you or not. It is well know than each nation tells its people the lies it chooses. We in Pakistan have done this too, including on the events on 1971.” A nation, in my opinion, is strengthened by its ability to accept responsibility for its mistakes. This is applicable to today as it was back then.

I’ll end this piece with a rather telling poster from the Liberation War Museum, which showcases the secular nature of the Bangladeshi state that still persists today (for the most part). The text reads, “Banglar Hindu, Banglar Christian, Banglar Buddhist, Banglar Muslim – We are all Bengali.”

The OBL #FAIL

Cutting edge technology? Na, try Google.

Last week, the FBI published fresh photographs of Osama bin Laden in an effort to track down the Al Qaeda leader and ideologue. In the first “age progressed” mug shot, the Guardian reported, “Forensic artists used digital enhancement to modify Bin Laden’s features in an attempt to show what he might now look like.”

At first glance, it looked like OBL was either badly in need of sunlight or prescribed to the same skin regimen as the late Michael Jackson [RIP, MJ]. Turns out that “digital enhancement” was just the product of really, really ridiculously good Googling.

Gasper Llamazares

According to news agencies yesterday, the mocked up image of OBL was withdrawn by the State Department after the FBI “admitted it was partly based on a photograph of a Spanish MP taken from the internet.” The intelligence agency reportedly updated the bin Laden photo using the grey hair, jaw line and forehead of politician Gaspar Llamazares, a member of Spain’s Communist party. Ken Hoffman, an FBI spokesman told the Spanish newspaper El Mundo, “The forensic artist was unable to find suitable features among the reference photographs and obtained those features, in part, from a photograph he found on the internet.”

Yikes.

According to Times Online, “Llamazares intends to ask the U.S. government for an explanation and is considering legal action.” He clarified at a news conference that he has “no similarity, physically or ideologically, to Bin Laden.” On Tuesday, the Associated Press reported that the lawmaker rejected the U.S.-issued apology for the mix-up, telling reporters, “I want a thorough investigation into this disgraceful case, which not only causes concern but also worry and indignation over the behavior of the FBI.”

Turns out not all intelligence is intelligent. Go figure.

With reports that Tehreek-e-Taliban commander Hakimullah Mehsud was injured in a drone strike last week in South Waziristan, I hope the aforementioned “cutting edge” technology won’t be used to prove this development. Because it may look a little like this:

Fake Hakimullah.

Real Hakimullah.

Brings Us to Our Knees

Image: Washington Post

On Thursday, Dawn reported that rescue workers recovered 16 bodies from under rubble in Kamsaar Village, just north of Muzzafarabad in Pakistan-Administered Kashmir. The people, traveling in a passenger coach, were reportedly trapped in the earthquake that struck Kashmir in 2005, a natural disaster that killed about 74,500 people and injured over 100,000 in the region.

It has been over four years since one of Pakistan’s most devastating earthquakes and we are still recovering victims. We still bear the scars of the thousands of lives lost. And yet, despite the fact that man-made conflict prevails throughout the world, that discrimination and violence have torn countries apart, nature has the power to bring us all to our knees. In the aftermath of earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, and cyclones, we come together.

For days, we have watched news and updates on the 7.0-magnitude earthquake that struck Haiti on January 12. On Thursday, a Haitian Red Cross official said as many as 50,000 may have been killed, while another government official estimated the death toll may reach 100,000. An International Red Cross official stated that up to 3 million people may have been affected by the quake.

On Thursday, CNN reported that Haitians took rescue efforts into their own hands, working for 24 hours with chisels, blowtorches, and their bare hands to free a man pinned under a collapsed school. The news agency added, “Those scenes of Haitians banding together to free their neighbors played out across the capital while the few rescue crews who managed to make it into the hillside city came face-to-face with the death and destruction caused by the massive quake.”

Watching the news, I was reminded of similar scenes that played out in the aftermath of the 2005 earthquake in Pakistan , when residents in Islamabad pitched in to help lift bricks and rubble in F-10, helping recover survivors from a collapsed apartment building. Hundreds of people collected blankets, food, tents, and clothes for the people displaced in Kashmir. Similar scenarios also took place following the tsunami in 2004, a disaster that killed nearly 230,000 people in 14 countries.

In the aftermath of Haiti, the global response and attention has been overwhelming. President Obama has promised $100 million in aid, and said the U.S. would grant “every element of our national capacity, our diplomacy and development assistance, the power of our military and most importantly, the compassion of our country” to Haiti.

In less than two days, a campaign “done solely through text messages and made viral on networking sites like Twitter and Facebook has raised more than $5 million for the Red Cross’s relief work in Haiti,” reported CNN today. Red Cross spokesman spokesman Jonathan Aiken described it as “a phenomenal number that’s never been achieved before.” Lance Armstrong posted on Twitter that his LiveStrong Foundation would give $230,000 to humanitarian aid groups. On Friday, January 22, George Clooney will host a live telethon to benefit the victims of Haiti, airing from 8-10 pm EST on all MTV channels worldwide along with ABC, NBC, HBO and CNN.

We shouldn’t have to ask why we should help Haiti. But if Pakistanis need a reason, we don’t have to look very far. Pakistan’s renowned philanthropist, Abdul Sattar Edhi has pledged $500,000 via the Edhi Foundation to relief efforts, and will reportedly travel to the country, (via Twitter user @curry_crayola). Given our own experiences with natural disasters, the Haiti earthquake should serve as a reminder about how connected we are, and how much we can do even in our small capacity.

For a list of reputable and vetted organizations you can donate to, click here.

Violence in Karachi 101

LA Times: Rehan Khan / European Pressphoto Agency

The recent spate of targeted killings in Karachi has garnered much media coverage, with news agencies reporting that 41 people have died in the commercial capital since the beginning of the year, “including 10 MQM workers, 10 from a breakaway faction called Haqiqi, and 16 members of a committee set up by the ruling party in Lyari to control violence in the area.” Most of the victims were reportedly killed because of their political affiliations.

According to BBC News, “It was the discovery of the decapitated body of an activist from the Muttahida Quami Movement (MQM) in the old city area of Lyari which sparked off the latest round of violence.” Speaking to the LA Times, analyst Ikram Sehgal described the current situation in Karachi, “Think of Chicago or New York a century ago.”

Despite joint calls by PPP and MQM leaders to restore order to the city, this is not the first time such a conflict has erupted. Dawn’s Huma Yusuf reported,

Karachi has a long history of ethnic conflict, sectarian violence, land mafias and intra- and inter-party tensions. All these have been in play during this past fortnight, making it abundantly clear that a discerning approach to Karachi’s violence is required. Policing and investigations into recent incidents must be informed by knowledge of ‘local’ social, political and economic factors, which in this city of 18 million differ from locality to locality. For that reason, the MQM’s request for the Rangers, the army and intelligence agencies to maintain law and order in the city is akin to slapping a band-aid on a deep, infected wound.

For many of us not from or currently living in Karachi, such a complex situation may seem daunting or difficult to understand. Below are some FAQ’s to better breakdown the nuances of this conflict:

Q: Who are the main parties in this conflict and how did it escalate out of control?

While Karachi has many rival gangs and factions, the main parties in the current conflict are workers or gang members associated with the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), which controls Karachi, and the Pakistan People’s Party, (PPP) which controls the provincial government of Sindh, of which Karachi is the capital.

While some of the recent killings have been linked to the general crime syndicates, many have been attributed to the land mafia, noted a journalist currently covering the story in Karachi.

The LA Times, in its coverage, noted, “Rival gangs aligned with political parties are at war in part because a large number of long-term land leases are about to expire, some dating back nearly a century to the days of British rule, with ownership reverting back to the local government.” Although Sehgal told the news agency, “This is all about land. It’s incredibly valuable and it’s up for grabs,” the journalist I spoke to noted,

For political expediency things are being blamed on just the land mafia or just the Baloch gangs in Lyari whereas it’s really a broader mix of elements. Some of it may be about land but in the end it’s all political and some say it has been linked with the abolishment of the local government system.

Ultimately, Karachi has a long history of factional violence and gang warfare, so many of these factors have become yet another reason to reopen old wounds.

Q: Why has Lyari been the hot spot for the recent violence and attention?

Lyari Town, one of 18 constituent towns in Karachi, is dominated by ethnic Balochis, who form a major vote bank for the PPP. The area has become the center of the rise in killings due to the lawless nature of the area, populated by gangs involved in  activities like extortion and drugs. The journalist I spoke to noted, “The Baloch [in Lyari] have been an easy target because they don’t have proper representation in the government. The PPP gets their votes from this group but they don’t adequately represent them.”

In response to the government’s subsequent deployment of paramilitary forces to Lyari, (which led to nearly 50 arrests), Lyari’s People’s Aman ["Peace"] Committee launched a protest on Monday against both PPP and MQM leaders. One organizer of the rally told reporters, “The government is victimizing its own people to appease its political allies, the Muttahida Qaumi Movement. We demand an operation in the whole city without any discrimination.” My journalist source, who has been reporting on the story, noted that many believe the government is undertaking this operation to show that “something is being done,” and targeted Lyari because it is an area that “can easily be disturbed without great political repercussions.”

Q: How effective have these paramilitary troops been in restoring some semblance of control in Karachi?

As the targeted killings increased over the weekend, Interior Minister Rehman Malik ordered patrols by police and paramilitary rangers to curb the violence, while asserting that political parties were not involved in the killings. While this appeared to work, at least temporarily, the LA Times noted that many in Karachi “didn’t expect it to last.” The aforementioned journalist source, based in Karachi, echoed, “The rangers that have been sent in with the police won’t make much of a difference, particularly since the police is politicized and doesn’t come under the jurisdiction of the city government.

Q: If violence between rival gangs and factions associated with political parties is not a new phenomenon, how can the cycle be broken?

According to Dawn’s Huma Yusuf, recognizing that the dynamics of Karachi’s violence is locally defined (i.e. not associated with militancy in Swat for example) and entrenched in a long history is “the first step towards effectively maintaining peace and stability.”

In the opinion of the journalist I interviewed, one immediate and long-term solution is developing a better funded and “de-politicized” police force, which can provide a more solid foundation for law and order. He noted, “29,000 police with around 90 odd police stations in a city of 18 million is completely inadequate.”

Although joint statements by the MQM and the PPP in the aftermath of these killings is significant, a top-down political solution will not be sufficient in fully addressing the multiple problems that exist on the ground. If the government seeks to achieve a long-term solution, [not just a strategy that places a band-aid over the problem] it must address the systematic root causes behind the violence and the inter-rivalries. Whether it’s the drug, land, or tanker mafia, this has ultimately been a struggle for power with continuously dire consequences.

Drawing Lines in the Battle for Hearts and Minds

Over the weekend, Pahjwok (via the AfPak Daily Brief) reported that police detained three alleged girl suicide bombers in Islamabad, “while two teenaged girl would-be suicide bombers surrendered to police in the troubled Swat valley.” The two girls, identified as Rabia and Arfa, revealed to reporters that they had been trained by militants associated with Mullah Fazlullah (the firebrand Swati cleric nicknamed the “Radio Mullah“). 14 year old Rabia noted, “During our training as suicide bombers, we have been told to believe that we would go immediately and straight to the heaven after carrying out suicide attacks in reward for this great service to Islam.” The news agency reported:

The girls said they changed their minds after coming to know that it was a wrong path to go and Fazlullah and his men were involved in torching schools and destroying bridges. She revealed dozens of girls like them fall prey to Taliban’s hands and the militants use them for suicide bombings. She appealed to all would-be suicide bombers not to carry out their attacks on the behalf of Fazlullah and his allies because such attacks result in killing of innocent people and their Muslim brethrens.

The News’ Rahimullah Yusufzai framed the two girls’ statements to the press in light of two other media events organized by Pakistani security forces on Saturday – the press conference of Mullah Fazlullah’s mother Amna Bibi and Fazlullah’s former teacher Maulana Waliullah Kabulgrami to the media. Taken alone, the statements by Rabia and Arfa are a disturbing indicator of the recruitment of female suicide bombers as well as the indoctrination of young girls and boys into militancy. When framed in light of the two other media events that day, Yusufzai noted, “it appeared that the security forces were on a mission to further damage the already battered image of the Swati Taliban.” Moreover, the statements by Mullah Fazlullah’s teacher criticizing the Swati Taliban leader and asserting that suicide bombings are un-Islamic “might influence public opinion in Malakand division and other parts of the country and harm the Taliban cause.”

It seems the military is arguably as intent in fighting this battle from an information operations standpoint as they are from a tactical perspective on the battlefield. Given the dissemination of Taliban propaganda, (often using the Al Qaeda production house Al-Sahab as their platform), Pakistan’s security forces are matching such efforts in this “battle for hearts and minds” with a campaign that villifies the enemy and sways potential Taliban sympathizers. The objective is simple: to marginalize support for these militant groups and cut their influence in this region.

That is why Yusufzai’s reaction to the military-initiated media events is interesting. He wrote:

A number of people who spoke to this writer were critical of the decision to bring Fazlullah’s mother before the cameras in Swat’s Khwazakhela area. And mind you none of them had any sympathy with the Taliban militants. In their view, keeping women and children out of the affairs of militants fighting the state should be the guiding principle of the government and the military trying to win the hearts and minds of the people in militancy-hit Frontier.

Recruiting young children and especially young girls into militancy is a disgusting tactic. That is undisputed. However, in this battle for the now-cliched “hearts and minds,” is it inappropriate or even counter-productive for Pakistan’s security forces to use them to convey that fact? Having Fazllulah’s purdah-wearing mother make an unprecedented public statement may help in villifying the enemy, but does it also earn the military supporters? Is there a line that the state shouldn’t cross?

Say Hello to My Rubber Glove

Image by AP

As of January 4, 2010, citizens of 14 nations – Afghanistan, Algeria, Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen – have all been dubbed countries of “interest.” And no, not interest in a good way, as in, “We see you as fellow human beings, let’s have a conversation and get to know one another.” Interest as in, “Hi, we see you as an immediate threat because of your religion and nationality, let’s have a conversation with my ominous rubber glove.”

And here I thought eight years after 9/11, we had learned so much.

I could get angry with Umar Farooq Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian who attempted to detonate an explosive in his underpants, forever earning himself the nickname “pantybomber.” Thanks to his actions on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 on Christmas Day, not just Nigerians, but people from 13 other countries dubbed “state sponsors of terrorism” have to suffer the consequences. The new rule will also apply to anyone traveling to U.S. destinations from those countries, who will all face extra scrutiny at airport screenings.

I could also point a finger at U.S. intelligence agencies, who reportedly had enough information to “head off” the attempted bombing but “failed to connect those dots,” noted President Obama in a statement yesterday. According to his administration, Obama further asserted in a meeting with Cabinet advisers and members, “This was a screw-up that could have been disastrous. It was averted by brave individuals not because the system worked, and that is not acceptable.”

But riddle me this, Mr. President – if the intelligence agencies screwed up, and the system failed to work, why are scores of people paying the price? Is this a sign of that mutual respect you so powerfully called for during your speech to the Muslim World in Cairo? Because, let me tell you, I don’t feel mutually respected when Don Juan of airport security calls me out of line, and not because he wants to perform a rubber sock puppet show for my enjoyment.

I am all for keeping us safe, and I am all for fending off terrorist threats. I am from a country whose citizens have been victimized by terrorism, that has been waging its own war, however successfully, against a similar threat. Last year alone, over 3000 people died in terrorist attacks in Pakistan. So believe me, I understand that you don’t want that threat on your soil. But neither do we. Treating each individual as one massive threat will only add to the problem, because it fails to recognize the nuances of this conflict, or the tremendous importance of perceptions. It is sad that in the eight years after 9/11, that lesson still has to be learned.